| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 14:19:54 -0800
From: Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@...cle.com>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
Cc: intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue 06/10] ixgbe: restore offloaded SAs
after a reset
On 12/7/2017 1:52 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>
> The reads/writes themselves should be cheap. These kind of things only
> get to be really expensive when you start looking at adding delays in
> between the writes/reads polling on things. As long as we aren't
> waiting milliseconds on things you can write/read thousands of
> registers and not even notice it.
>
> One thing you might look at doing in order to speed some of this up a
> bit would be to also combine updating the Tx SA and Rx SA in your
> clear_hw_tables loop so that you could do them in parallel in your
> loop instead of having to do them in series. Anyway it is just a
> thought. If nothing else you might look at timing the function to see
> how long it actually takes. I suspect it shouldn't be too long since
> the turnaround time on the PCIe bus should be in microseconds so odds
> are reading/writing 35K registers might ovinly add a few milliseconds
> to total reset time.
>
Good ideas - thanks,
sln
Powered by blists - more mailing lists